Cases by Area of Law


Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another

[2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)

Barrister: Philip Robson
Area of Law: Planning 
Summary: Philip successfully acted as junior to Peter Wadsley in the High Court on behalf of Forest of Dean District Council in an important planning decision in the case of Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin). This case provides much needed judicial guidance to LPAs who often come up against the problem of the “significantly and demonstrably” balance in NPPF paragraph 14 as a result of not showing a 5-year housing land supply.

View news article: Planning barristers’ Peter Wadsley and Philip Robson successful in the High Court in Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another

Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another

[2016] EWHC 421 (Admin)

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning 
Summary: Peter successfully acted in the High Court on behalf of Forest of Dean District Council in an important planning decision in the case of Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another [2016] EWHC 421 (Admin). This case provides much needed judicial guidance to LPAs who often come up against the problem of the “significantly and demonstrably” balance in NPPF paragraph 14 as a result of not showing a 5-year housing land supply.

View news article: Planning barristers’ Peter Wadsley and Philip Robson successful in the High Court in Forest of Dean District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & another

R (Freedman) v Wiltshire Council

[2014] EWHC 211 Admin (6.2.14 Bristol, Lewis J)

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning
Summary:
Under s. 191(4) TCPA a local planning authority can substitute a lawful use of another description for that claimed in the application form, if the evidence before it supports that course.   Whether the LPA had lawfully done so was decided in the case of R (Freedman) v Wiltshire Council.

Download detailed discussion about this case: R (Freedman) v Wiltshire Council

Jones v North Somerset Council

Barrister: David Fletcher
Area of Law: Planning
Summary: appeal re land at East Failand (2010)

Section 76 appeal against a refusal of planning permission for a major housing development at a Green Belt location which, according to the local planning authority (North Somerset), contravened all existing and emerging policies in housing location.  The appeal was determined by the Secretary of State in view of its importance, and turned heavily on the interpretation and weight to be given to the then emerging RSS (now abolished by the new government).  The appeal was decided in favour of the local planning authority shortly after the change of government.

Trim v North Dorset DC

[2010] EWCA Civ 1446; [2011] 1 WLR 1901 (CA)

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning
Summary:
Breach of condition notice served under s171A TCPA; challenge by Part 8 claim approximately 17 months after the service of the notice. CA held that procedure by JR should have been used (following O’Reilly v Mackman) and that it was too late to allow the proceedings to continue by JR.

Howells v SSCLG and Gloucestershire CC

[2009] EWHC 2757 Admin; [2010] JPL 741

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning

Summary: Enforcement notice; whether the Inspector could add a further area of land to the land enforced against in the notice.

R (Bristol City Council) v Bristol Magistrates’ Court

[2009] EWHC 625 Admin

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning

Summary: Proper application of ss17-18 Licensing Act 2003; whether Magistrates had properly considered the applicant’s operating schedule; whether this had properly applied the law and guidance; costs, application of Bradford MBC v Booth.

R. (on the application of Carroll) v South Somerset DC

[2008] EWHC 104 (Admin)

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning

Summary: A slightly unusual claim for judicial review, seeking to quash an allegedly erroneous grant of planning permission made by the South Somerset District Council when the Council had failed to follow its own procedures. The application was by the leader of the Council.

Small v North Somerset Council

[2008] EWHC 2982 (Admin);  [2008] All ER (D) 245

Barrister: David Fletcher
Area of Law: Planning
Summary:
High Court challenge to the recently adopted North Somerset Local Plan, on the grounds that the gypsy policies did not accord with the Structure Plan, nor with government guidance.  Challenge rejected by the Administrative Court, principally on the basis that existing gypsy policies were under review in accordance with the new plan system, and it was unrealistic to expect the local planning authority to restart the old plan process.

R. (Egerton) v Taunton Deane BC

[2008] EWHC 2752 Admin

Barrister: Peter Wadsley
Area of Law: Planning

Summary: Curtilage of listed building and extent of the curtilage. Whether the council could properly conclude that the building was not part of the curtilage.